Tim Smith Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 Even if there is an occassional female, there isn't a ratio of males to females that would indicate any kind of settled population or any other evidence of reproduction. You don't draw sound scientific conclusions on scant evidence. If this is all the information they have right now then it makes sense for them to be conservative and wait until they have something conclusive. They're going to be under a lot of pressure from all sides on an issue like this and taking hasty actions or positions will only lead to trouble later. If things are in flux and lions are re-establishing themselves in Missouri now it will take a while to know that for sure (and if it's only one or two lions the fact that they are here today doesn't mean they will be here tomorrow). Give this some time and take it easy on your Department of Conservation. They need your support.
duckydoty Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 It appears they are making their way towards our new elk heard A Little Rain Won't Hurt Them Fish.....They're Already Wet!! Visit my website at.. Ozark Trout Runners
jdmidwest Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 It appears they are making their way towards our new elk heard MDC already thinned that out enough in KY. "Life has become immeasurably better since I have been forced to stop taking it seriously." — Hunter S. Thompson
Stoneroller Posted March 26, 2011 Author Posted March 26, 2011 ok, lets take a moment for some background in wildlife population genetics. Overall, wildlife populations typically reproduce at a 1:1 male:female ratio. For MDC to make the assumption that all these sightings are young males wandering around "looking for territory" is pretty shortsighted on their part. And no Chief, it's not bashing, it's the facts. I'm not sure who their population biologist is, but epic fail on that individual's part. Think about young male humans. Clearly they always hang out where no females can be found. teenage boys are into all kinds of stuff, but girls are never one of them... do the math, it's not a difficult concept to understand. Males aren't going to wander into an area with no females, it's conterproductive to reproduction. All a male of breeding age thinks about is food, sleep, females. (not neccessarily in that order) Fish On Kayak Adventures, LLC. Supreme Commander 'The Dude' of Kayak fishing www.fishonkayakadventures.com fishonkayakadventures@yahoo.com
troutfiend1985 Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 In that link I provided, 11 of the 15 confirmed were either photos, or tracks. The other 4 had a carcass in which gender was determined. There is no way the MDC can the statment of..."All confirmed sightings have been male since. . ." And again, until evidence is discovered, such as a den or kits, you cannot say with any validity that there is a breeding pair within the borders of Missouri. And you want to be my lawyer??? All right, you got me, I was wrong with that first beer influenced statement. Ok, Mr. Semantics it should read that "MDC HAS ONLY CONFIRMED ONE FEMALE MOUNTAIN LION SINCE 1994." Is that better for you?? Motion to amend pleading your honor Objection to irrelevant statements as I never argued that there were secret breeding populations in MO, at least not on this post. Motion for a 12(b )(6) failure to state a claim that is wasting our forum space. Ok, over with the semantics. By no means am I a journalist, so if my lack of journalism skills (while sipping on beers ) deters you from hiring me as a lawyer in the future then I can understand. “The greatest menace to freedom is an inert people” J. Brandeis
Wayne SW/MO Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 Still no big deal. They are elusive and many states have thousands of them and people don't worry about them. As far as determining gender from a sighting, it's possible. There was one that made the news here that was a female who was sighted on a golf course. The lady who took the pictures survived the sighting of the momma and her two kittens. Today's release is tomorrows gift to another fisherman.
Tim Smith Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 ok, lets take a moment for some background in wildlife population genetics. Overall, wildlife populations typically reproduce at a 1:1 male:female ratio. For MDC to make the assumption that all these sightings are young males wandering around "looking for territory" is pretty shortsighted on their part. And no Chief, it's not bashing, it's the facts. I'm not sure who their population biologist is, but epic fail on that individual's part. Think about young male humans. Clearly they always hang out where no females can be found. teenage boys are into all kinds of stuff, but girls are never one of them... do the math, it's not a difficult concept to understand. Males aren't going to wander into an area with no females, it's conterproductive to reproduction. All a male of breeding age thinks about is food, sleep, females. (not neccessarily in that order) What would be an epic fail would be to base policy statements and public information on speculation and assumptions about adaptive behaviors. Quite a few males get driven to places where they have no hope of reproducing... ...such as fishing forums. Chief is right on this one. They don't have solid information and neither do you. That's just how it is sometimes. Cut them some slack! Dealing with the public is not an easy process.
Chief Grey Bear Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 ok, lets take a moment for some background in wildlife population genetics. Overall, wildlife populations typically reproduce at a 1:1 male:female ratio. For MDC to make the assumption that all these sightings are young males wandering around "looking for territory" is pretty shortsighted on their part. And no Chief, it's not bashing, it's the facts. I'm not sure who their population biologist is, but epic fail on that individual's part. Actually, I think nature produces slightly more females. Typically one male can and will breed with many females in any one season. As for the subject at hand, here are the facts. Of the 15 confimed sitings, not counting the most recent due to the info not being released yet, only 4 are of a known gender. Of those, 3 were male and 1 female. So a little quick math will tell that is 3 out of 4. Or you can say 75% have been male. Now since it is not known what the gender of the other 11 were, it is not a good practice to make assumptions. The only epic failure is on your part to understand what you are reading. And I am not trying to beat up on you like you are not beating on the MDC but, all of the info is out there. Chief Grey Bear Living is dangerous to your health Owner Ozark Fishing Expeditions Co-Owner, Chief Executive Product Development Team Jerm Werm Executive Pro Staff Team Agnew Executive Pro Staff Paul Dallas Productions Executive Pro Staff Team Heddon, River Division Chief Primary Consultant Missouri Smallmouth Alliance Executive Vice President Ronnie Moore Outdoors
Gary Lange Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 I hope we do have a few Females out there as that would give me a better chance at getting to see one. Got to be a beautiful sight to behold in the wild. Respect your Environment and others right to use it!
jdmidwest Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 So the scientific theory was all the male cats were out looking for something other than other pussy. I am sticking with Ducky's Elk theory. Or maybe they are the queer cats from California coming to visit relatives. "Life has become immeasurably better since I have been forced to stop taking it seriously." — Hunter S. Thompson
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now